https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Segher Boessenkool :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:748d46cd049c89a799f99f14547267ebae915af6
commit r12-8222-g748d46cd049c89a799f99f14547267ebae915af6
Author: Segher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Segher Boessenkool :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26fa464f42622c60d6929720dd37143a21054ede
commit r12-8221-g26fa464f42622c60d6929720dd37143a21054ede
Author: Segher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #11)
> Segher,
> Will you commit your patch in stage4? Several issues are supposed to be
> fixed by your patch. Thanks.
Yes, of course, but there have been
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
HaoChen Gui changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||npiggin at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Created attachment 52131
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52131=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So it seems to think that all registers in the preferred class,
GEN_OR_VSX_REGS,
are the same cost? They very much are not :-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Not only is this a missed-optimization, it also is a regression (in GCC 10
already). It seems like the root cause here may be the same as in PR102169.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #5 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Bisection reveals that this starts with this commit:
20d70cd2719815d9ea853314775ae5787648ece5 is the first bad commit
commit 20d70cd2719815d9ea853314775ae5787648ece5
Author: Alan Modra
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #4 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I was compiling with -mcpu=power9, yes:
/home2/sawdey/work/gcc/trunk/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/home2/sawdey/work/gcc/trunk/build/gcc -O3 -mcpu=power9 bug2.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #2 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
>From the reload dump:
0 Non input pseudo reload: reject++
1 Non-pseudo reload: reject+=2
1 Non input pseudo reload: reject++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
--- Comment #1 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looking at trunk, after expand we have this:
(note 5 1 2 2 [bb 2] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK)
(insn 2 5 3 2 (set (reg/v/f:DI 117 [ a ])
(reg:DI 3 3 [ a ])) "bug2.c":3:1 -1
(nil))
(insn
14 matches
Mail list logo
